Muslim American Women on Campus: Undergraduate Social Life and Identity

6 Conclusion

173 6 Conclusion “Covered” and Assertive Muslim Identities yasmin: Like, either I have to be completely assimilated, completely into this culture or either I have to become completely like, Muslim, and be separate instead of a part. Muslim women felt the tension of binary identities on campus. Did it have to be a zero-sum game? Did you have to be socially divided from hedonistic campus culture or completely assimilated “into this culture”? Yes, actually, it seemed very much like a zero-sum game when Muslim identities were mauled not only by American military and intelligence actions but also in the social spaces of campus culture , when “that outcast . . . that really foreign belief about alcohol” and hijab, modest clothes, and not-dating clashed with the narrowly conceived “normal” American college student. As my participants constructed Muslim American identities, they deployed as well as “covered” racial, cultural, and religious attributes contextually, and religionized identities were also inscribed on them. Increasingly perceived as outsiders, Muslim women made the camouflaging of religious identities an integral element of their response to encompassing cultural and political surveillance. As the boundaries of Americanness contracted, pushing out immigrants and people of color, Roshan and Heather tacitly disavowed the stigma of Muslim identity, protected it from public exposure, and disguised their religiosity under the secular “uniform” of “normal” behavior. In invisibility lies safety. In liminality one may conduct one’s identity work in relative security. Yet when the individual regards his or her own attributes as “defiling” (Goffman 1963: 7), how genuine can such safety be? 174 Conclusion Muslim American women treated Muslim modesty, courtship, and teetotalism like dirty secrets, contaminations that reduced their normalcy quotient in campus culture. Yasmin, for instance, toned down the visibility of her religious affiliation by strategically excluding Muslim referees from internship applications: “Can you really change things from outside the system?” she asked. “So I think it’s much more likely you can change the system from the inside.” A political and cultural sea change required long-term, low-key labor. The luxury of being true to oneself—whatever that meant for an individual—was not available until the cultural project of Muslim American indigenization was complete. So Yasmin disavowed and covered Muslim identity: if accepted by the dominant majority, if “inside” the system, she might become part of a cultural undercurrent that would eventually pull Muslims into the mainstream. Sharmila and Amber rejected the passivity of Yasmin’s silences: the critical political situation demanded “loud” identities, not covered ones. amber: Yes, now in every single thing I feel like I have to speak up [bitter laugh]. No one else is going to do it for us and we’re just going to be stomped on. And yes, it’s constant pressure, but if I don’t do it then I’m not going to respect myself. . . . There’s a handful [of Muslims on campus] who care. And the rest, . . . they don’t do anything about it. . . .They’ll be like, . . . “They [law enforcement and intelligence] are all going to take us all.” . . . But they’re not going to do anything. . . . It [apathy] is a way to protect themselves too. . . . Personally. But Sharmila and Amber, as conservative hijabis, along with their friends and families, prominent Washington area religious Muslims, were already at risk in the war on terror.The apathetic Muslims were protecting themselves “personally,” but the visible Muslims were constructed as primarily Muslim, and not as private persons with secular interests and identities to protect. Her plans for the future in jeopardy , Amber became more visibly and vocally Muslim, rather than less visibly like Yasmin. For overtly religious Muslims like Amber, who had never been a vocal person, assertive identities were inescapable, rather than a choice. Conclusion 175 Conservative Muslims like Amber could not benefit from the “diversity showcase”of college.When it is a subdued ingredient blended into a medley of flavors, differentness is “interesting” and “fun,” but when bold and noticeable, differentness is seen as menacing and alien. Muslim women quickly learned that, to belong in campus social and leisure cultures, it was better to “cover” their religious Muslim identities, implement (or pretend to implement) the hedonistic hidden curriculum, and transcend religious and ethnic commitments . Visible Muslims, however, had no choice but to “speak out.” Whether in the form of Yasmin’s covered identities or Sharmila’s loud identities, the heart of campus culture—like the heart...